PENNSYLVANIA HISTORY - Journals

PENNSYLVANIAHISTORY

VOLUME I APRIL, 1934 NUMBER 2

SAMUEL BRECK AND THE PENNSYLVANIASCHOOL LAW OF 1834

By WARREN F. HEWITTJonestown High School

A T the present time a large number of children in Pennsylva-A nia are threatened with the curtailment of educational privi-leges owing to the lack of funds necessary to maintain our freepublic schools. Programs of all kinds are being cut down, coursesare being dropped or combined, and many schools may be closedlong before the end of the school year. It seems rather a coinci-dence that this halt in the progress of the schools of the stateshould come just one hundred years after the establishment offree public schools. It is worth noting, however, that the year1834 was an eventful one in the history of Pennsylvania becauseit brought the first law for the establishment of the public schoolsystem. It is the object of this paper to trace the enactment ofthis law together with the conditions leading up to it, and to showthe part played by Samuel Breck, "The Father of the PublicSchool Law," in having it written on the statute books of the state.

The educational history of Pennsylvania before 1834 may bedivided into two periods: the colonial period, and the half centurypreceding the passage of the law of 1834. At the time of theRevolution, education was less promising than in any other periodbefore or since. The liberally educated men among the earlysettlers had passed away, and in most cases their learning hadpassed with them. Life in the new world was unfavorable for thetransmission of learning. The masses were too poor, too busy

63

PENNSYLVANIA HISTORY

earning a living, too much absorbed in political and religious con-troversies to provide for the education of their children. WilliamPenn and his immediate successors adopted legislation favorableto education, but for fifty years before the Revolution the subjecthad been neglected. In 1775 comparatively few grown personscould do more than read, write, and calculate.

Although Philadelphia was the intellectual center of the country,education in general had fallen into disrepute. The educationalpolicy which existed in Pennsylvania for fifty years after theconclusion of the Revolution embraced two phases. The first wasthe establishment in all parts of the state of endowed academies,in which a small number of destitute pupils were to be taughtgratuitously. The second was the free instruction of poor chil-dren in existing church schools or neighborhood schools. Mostchurches offered some form of elementary education, and neigh-borhood schools were also organized, but still most children didnot receive even the mere rudiments of education.

Attempts to establish free schools in Pennsylvania by constitu-tional and legislative action were made from the time of the inde-pendence of the colonies, but many years elapsed before a publicschool system became a reality. The first step was made in theConstitution of 1776, which provided that: "A school or schoolsshall be established in each county by the Legislature for the con-venient instruction of youth, with such salaries to the masters paidby the public as may enable them to instruct youth at low prices;and all useful learning shall be duly encouraged and promoted inone or more Universities." After the Revolution there was anera of educational activity. Colleges and academies receivedgrants of money and land, but public schools never received anybenefit from such grants.

The Constitution of 1790 came a little closer toward the estab-lishment of public schools. The section on education providedthat: "The Legislature shall, as soon as conveniently may be, pro-vide by law for the establishment of schools throughout the state,in such manner that the poor may be taught gratis." This section,as first introduced, was opposed by the friends of public educationbecause in its original form it would have made unconstitutionalany law establishing free public schools or making the schools freeeven to the poor. The leader to broaden the proposed section wasTimothy Pickering of Luzerne County, who had migrated from

64

SAMUEL BRECK AND THE SCHOOL LAW

Massachusetts. Pickering and his colleagues were conscious ofthe fact that they were laying the basis for free schools. Thisprovision was the only constitutional provision on the subject ofeducation until 1874.

Following this action, efforts on behalf of general public educa-tion were directed to the end of providing free instruction forthose who were too poor to pay. The laws simply provided forthe education of children of the poor at public expense in existingschools. The government now aided such church and neighbor-hood schools as would furnish this education.

No law for the free education of the poor, however, was enacteduntil 1802. Similar laws were passed in 1804 and 1809. Thetitle and aim of each of these laws were practically the same, andwe can get an idea of them by examining the law of 1809, whichremained in force until 1834. The law was entitled, "An Act toProvide for the More Effectual Education of the Children of thePoor Gratis." According to this act the assessors were requiredto make lists of the names of children whose parents were too poorto pay for schooling. Such parents were to be informed that theirchildren could be sent to school free. The assessors gave the listsof names to the teachers, who kept a record of the pupils, the daysthey attended, and the stationery, books, and supplies used. Thecommissioner then approved the records and directed the treasurerto pay the teachers. By this legislation no attempt was made toestablish or regulate a single school, nor did it attempt to regulatein any way the existing ones. However, it compelled parents tomake a public record of their poverty and give their children thatstigma. This was the outstandingidefect of the law.

In 1818 an act was adopted which provided for establishingschools in Philadelphia for educating the poor on the Lancasterianplan. A similar law was adopted in 1821 for the schools in Cum-berland, Dauphin, Lancaster, and Allegheny counties. The lastpiece of important educational legislation before 1834 was the actof 1831, which provided for the establishment of a general systemof education through the creation of a school fund. By this lawa fund was to be created by the assignment of money due fromunpatented lands secured to the state and from other sources. Theinterest was to be added to the principal until the interest shouldamount to $100,000, after which it was to be distributed each yearfor the support of the schools.

65


That the system which developed under these laws failed ma-terially to produce the desired results is clearly evident from thecondemnation made by public opinion, and from a study of reportsmade at that time. Letters were sent out to the various countycommissioners in 1833 asking for a statement of the condition ofschools in their counties. From these reports it was learned thatin forty-nine counties "the average number of children returnedunder the act of the 4th of April, 1809, during the year 1829 was15,002. The amount expended under provisions of the same actwas $46,850.54½2. The year 1830, the number returned was15,839-the amount expended, $51,859.10X2. In the year 1831 thenumber returned was 17,224-the amount expended, $52,331.40'2,And in the year 1832, the number returned was 17,467-thcamount expended, $48,466.25."'

The Commissioner on Education in his report to the House oiRepresentatives on February 15, 1833, pointed out that the condi-tion which distinguished between the rich and the poor in regarcto education was a lamentable one. He stated that there shoulcbe no distinction except when necessary to afford the necessariesof life to those who were sick, or stricken with misfortune. Con-tinuing his report, he said that although the laws for the educatiorof the poor professed to confer a benefit, they actually inflicted astigma upon the poor, infusing a sense of inferiority upon growingyouth.2

.

The agitation for free schools, which had begun as a tiny seecwith independence in 1776, had grown into a mighty oak by thebeginning of the second quarter of the nineteenth century. Man)of the more progressive organizations took an active part in th(movement. The Society for the Establishment of Sunday Schoohpetitioned the legislature to enact a law providing for a generasystem of education as early as 1792. A leading part was takerby the Pennsylvania Society for the Promotion of Public Schoolswhich was organized in Philadelphia in 1827, with Robert VauBas its president. The society continued to make annual reportsfor several years. It was as a result of the action of this organiza-tion that public meetings were held in various places throughoutthe state in 1830-31, including Carlisle, Strasburg, Washington

t Samuel Hazard, Register of Pennsylvania (April 6, 1833), XI, 209.2 Ibid., XI, 145.

66


and Philadelphia. All favored the cause of general education. In1831 petitions for a better school system were sent to the legisla-ture from twenty-four counties.'

All the governors from Governor Miffin in 1790 to Governor

Wolf in 1834 showed an extremely favorable attitude toward the

establishment of a general system of education. Each one devoteda part of his public messages to the subject of education. Afterexamining these sections one cannot fail to see the value and im-portance which they attributed to a good system of education andthe necessity which they felt for the same. A high tribute should

be paid to these men for the open and uncompromising stand theytook. Possibly the best way to secure an idea of their attitude isto quote from their messages. In his annual message of 1792,Governor Mifflin urged the establishment of public schools bysaying: "As education is directly united with the courts of justice

in producing an habitual obedience to the authority of the laws,and in preserving the peace and order of society, it will not beimproper here to express a wish, that the establishment of publicschools, contemplated by the Constitution, may receive favorableattention; for . . . it is better to prevent'than to punish offenses;and the diffusion of knowledge . . . is the safest, the best instru-ment, that government can employ."4

In his opening message to the Assembly in 1805, Governor Mc-Kean reminded that body of the constitutional provision of 1790relating to schools. He continued: "Let me, then, claim an earlyattention for the important subject. It remains for you . . . tointroduce a general system of education, that shall infuse into themind of every citizen a knowledge of his rights and duties; thatshall excite the useful ambition of excelling in stations of publictrust; and that shall guard the representative principle, from theabuses of intrigue and imposture."'

In the section of his annual message of 1811 devoted to educa-tion!Governor Snyder said in part: "To ignorance, our prisons,our penitentiaries, and our poor houses are principally indebted

3 The counties sending in petitions were: Tioga, Philadelphia, Allegheny,Fayette, Huntingdon, Cumberland, Lancaster, Bradford, Washington, North-umberland, Westmoreland, Chester, Cambria, Susquehanna, York, McKean,Greene, Northampton, Indiana, Venango, Clearfield, Somerset, Luzerne, andFranklin.

Pennsylvania Archives, Fourth Series (Harrisburg, 1900-02), IV, 241.Ibid., IV, 570.

67


for their inhabitants. The value of education is incalculably eihanced in a government of the people, such as ours, where eveicitizen may be called in his turn, to legislate, or to execute. .general diffusion of knowledge, can alone insure and perpetuaour republican institutions. Without a competent portion of iiformation rational liberty cannot be realized. It ceases, indee,to be a blessing. It degenerates into licentiousness." 6

In his inaugural address of 1820, Governor Heister said:appears an imperative duty to introduce and support a libersystem of education."' In his message of 1824 he stated: "Ithe stability of our republican institutions depends upon the intcligence of our citizens, the instruction of our youth should never Ilost sight of by the government of a free people." 8 In his annumessage of 1827 Governor Shulze made the following plea f(education: "Among the injunctions of the Constitution, therenone more interesting than that which enjoins it as a duty on tllegislature to provide for the education of the poor throughothe Commonwealth. Whether we regard it in its probable inflience, upon the stability of our free government, or as it m.contribute to social and individual happiness, it equally deservthe earnest and unremitted attention of those who are honor(with the high trust of providing for the public welfare."9

The highest tribute is due Governor Wolf for his untiriiactivity in behalf of this project. To him fell the honor of seeiithe work accomplished after an unceasing struggle of fifty yeaxAny vacillation on his part at this time might have been fatal sinthere still were many adversaries of the measure the greatest Iwhich, as he himself said, were "prejudice, avarice, ignorance, alerror.''0 However, the governor took every opportunity offerto speak in favor of the establishment of a general system.:his message of 1833 he said: "Universal education, if it were pratical to enforce it everywhere, would operate as a powerful che,on vice, and would do more to diminish the black catalogue ,crimes, generally so prevalent, than any other measure, whethfor prevention or punishment, that has hitherto been devised;this State, it is not only considered as being entirely practicab

G Ibid., IV, 749.Ibid., V, 247.Ibid., V, 550.Ibid., V, 753.Ibid., V, 905.

68


but is enjoined by the Constitution as a solemn duty, the non-compliance with which, has already stamped the stain of inex-cusable negligence, upon the character of the Commonwealth,which nothing short of prompt and efficient measures in com-pliance with the constitutional requisition can remove."" In 1834he pointed out that the bill which had been introduced at the previ-ous session of the legislature had failed to pass because of certainobvious defects. He expressed the hope that the proposed schoollaw would be passed by the legislature which had just convened,to provide education for rich and poor alike.12

From the foregoing it is evident that the work of establishingfree schools was not the work of a day nor of one man. Thecauses that produced the law of 1834 were as old as the Common-wealth. But it was class distinction, preserved in the schools, thatfinally caused the old system to fail. A system of schools inwhich the poorer classes were forced publicly to make a show oftheir poverty could not be maintained forever. Thus, the stagewas set for the inauguration of a new system.

The honor of writing the Public School Law and steering itthrough the legislature fell to Samuel Breck, elected to the Senatefrom the Second District, composed of the county of Philadelphia,for the term beginning in 1833. Christopher Heydrick said ofBreck: "There is satisfactory evidence of the industry and zeal onMr. Breck's part in the collection of information for the enlighten-ment of the committee and that the report and bill submittedtherewith were the work of his hand.""13

Samuel Breck was born in Boston on July 17, 1771, of one ofthe best families of the flourishing metropolis. His paternal ances-tors came from England with Governor Winthrop in 1630. Hewas the son of Samuel Breck and his wife Hannah Andrews.Breck was in the habit of keeping a diary in which he jotted downnotes, bits of personal experience, and reflections on things he sawand heard. In one of his notes he states that as a child he washeld in the arms of a nurse on a hill overlooking Boston and was"an unconscious spectator of the Battle of Bunker Hill."'4

On December 24, 1782, he was sent to France to study at Soreze

Ibid., VI, 124.1 Ibid., VI, 189.

The Penn Germania (January, 1912), I, 84.H. E. Scudder, Recollections of Samuel Breck (Philadelphia, 1877),

p. 17.

69


in Lower Languedoc. He was treated with the most fatherly carewhile at school there. After leaving the school he traveled fortwo months with his friend Don Crozal. He returned to Bostonafter an absence of four and one-half years. His studies in Franceincluded ancient and modern languages, exact sciences, drawing,music, dancing, writing, fencing, and military service. After hereturned from France he began work in the counting house of afriend. On August 20, 1790, he again set out on a trip to Europe.He first visited England where he saw King George III and Par-liament. Then he traveled to Paris, where he heard a debate inthe National Assembly. He returned to the United States in 1791.

In 1792 the Breck family moved to Philadelphia because of asystem of taxation which drove out of Boston some of the richestinhabitants of that city. The family took up its residence in thehouse then located on the north side of Market Street midwaybetween Eighth and Ninth Streets. On December 24, 1795, Breckwas united in marriage to Jean Ross, the daughter of a merchantof Philadelphia. Their only child died upon reaching woman-hood.

Breck continued in business for many years but always foundplenty of time to be identified with public affairs. In 1817 he waselected to the state Senate and served two terms. He was a mem-ber of the Eighteenth Congress, from 1823 to 1825, and pridedhimself on the fact that he was the only representative from Penn-sylvania to vote for John Quincy Adams in the election contestwhich had been thrown into the House. He was again elected tothe state Senate in 1833. Of this incident Dr. Worthington, ofChester, who served with him on the Committee of Education,said: "He told me that he had come to the Legislature for the pur-pose of using his best efforts to secure the establishment of asystem of common schools in the state, and had it not been for thisgreat desideratum in the legislation of the state, he would not haveaccepted a seat in the Senate. When this was done, his intentionwas to decline any further public honors of this kind.""5

Breck was an active member of the Pennsylvania HistoricalSociety as early as 1825, of which organization he later becamevice-president. He was a member of the American PhilosophicalSociety and for many years, president of the Athenaum. His

J. P. Wickersham, A History of Education in Pennsylvania (Lancaster,1886), p. 390.

70


close association with educational life is shown by the fact that hewas a trustee of the University of Pennsylvania and president ofthe Pennsylvania Institution for the Instruction of the Blind. Ofhis character enough has been said by his contemporaries to war-rant the belief that he possessed the most laudable virtues to bedesired by anyone. J. R. Ingersoll said of him: "He was correctin his deportment and honorable in conduct; of amiable temperand lively and affectionate feelings; quick in perception, and oftenacious memory and sound judgment; industrious when he hadanything particular to do, and looking out for it when he had not;of strict punctuality; a good Christian and husband, father, neigh-bor, and friend, and a patriotic citizen; domestic in habit andtemperate in living-yet well inclined to social intercourse."", J.F. Fisher, another contemporary, in speaking of him stated:"Interested in all public matters, warm in his political opinions,but always insisting upon an honorable course and always liberaland just to his opponents, he may be said never to have made anenemy, and never to have lost a friend."17

Pennsylvania owes Samuel Breck all honor, and certainly needsnot feel ashamed to have placed the name of her adopted sonamong the group of immortals whose names now adorn the friezeof the new Educational Building at Harrisburg. To SamuelBreck, "The Father of the Public School Law" of Pennsylvania,every citizen of the state owes gratitude and thanks, for his partin the establishment of such a system that guarantees to every oneat least the rudiments of an education.

During the legislative session of 1832-33 an unsuccessful attemptwas made to enact a school law. The Senate seemed opposed toconsider any questions connected with education. It postponedseveral resolutions and proposed bills. The House, which wasmore progressive, made more progress in this direction, but nodefinite action was taken when it adjourned. The tenor of thelegislative body was greatly changed between the sessions, and thenew legislature which convened on December 3, 1833, presenteda more favorable attitude toward considering such legislation.

On the first day of the session a motion was made in the Senateby Samuel Breck, and seconded by Jacob Kern, that a committeebe appointed to work with a similar committee of the House "for

" Memoir of the Late Samuel Breck (Philadelphia, 1863), p. 35.Memoir of Samuel Breck (Philadelphia, 1863), p. 28.

71


the purpose of digesting a system of general education for thisCommonwealth, and that all reports, together with the unfinishedbusiness of last session, upon that subject, be referred to said jointcommittee, who are instructed to report as early as possible, bybill or otherwise.""' On December 5, 1833, the Senate resumedthe second reading and consideration of Breck's motion. Themotion was adopted and the committee was appointed. The Housewas informed accordingly. The members from the Senate ap-pointed to the committee were Samuel Breck, Chairman, CharlesPenrose, William Jackson, Almon Reed, and William Boyd.19

The House also adopted the Breck resolution and appointed themembers to the committee on December 7th. The members fromthe House were Samuel Anderson, William Patterson, JamesThompson, James Clarke, John Weigand, Thomas Crawford, andWilmer Worthington.2 0

The committee immediately began work on framing the bill forpresentation to the legislature. The guiding hand of Breck wasconstantly in evidence. As chairman of the committee he addressedcircular letters to the governors of Maine, New Hampshire, Con-necticut, New York, and Ohio. He also got into communicationwith the educational leaders throughout the country. These wereasked about school funds in their respective states, school taxes,the preparation of teachers, and other questions relating to educa-tional systems. Breck received letters in answer to his questionsfrom everyone to whom he had written.2" From these letters andreports he secured the information necessary to lay the foundationfor the educational system of the state. Pennsylvania was indeedfortunate to have a man of the caliber and ability of Breck aschairman of the committee.

On January 22, 1834, Breck brought in his report accompaniedby the bill entitled: "An Act for the Purpose of General Educa-

1 Journal of the Senate of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, i833-34(Harrisburg, 1834), I, 9.

Ibid., I, 49.2 Journal of the Forty-fourth House of Representatives of the Common-

wealth of Pennsylvania, 1833-34 (Harrisburg, 1834), I, 29.21 Replies were received from President George Junkin, Lafayette College;

President Chauncey Cloton, Bristol College; Robert Vaux; Governor Marcy,New York; John A. Dix; Secretary of State W. H. Kirby, Ohio; Secretaryof State Ralph Metcalf, New Hampshire; Governor Henry W. Edwards,Connecticut; Governor Samuel E. Smith, Maine; A. C. Flagg, New York;President B. 0. Peers, Transylvania University; and W. R. Johnson, Phila-delphia.

72


tion by Common Schools." A similar bill was reported in theHouse by Samuel Anderson on January 27th. In his report Breckpointed out that the right of suffrage was broad in Pennsylvania-that the right to vote was given to almost everyone regardless ofwealth. He pointed out that a large majority of the populationwas unable to read and write and that a system of general educationin which rich and poor would be given the rudiments of an edu-cation was essential. He explained that the proposed system wasnot compulsory, but that it made provision for a general plan. Hefelt that one of the chief preparatory steps was the training ofefficient teachers. This could be done in the colleges and semi-naries. He also pointed out the necessity of having manual train-ing taught in conjunction with other subjects. Lastly, he madereference to the progress that was being made in other states andin foreign countries, including England, France, and Prussia.

The House resolved itself into a committee of the whole on theeducational bill on February 15th. The bill was finally reportedwith amendments and prepared for the second reading. In theSenate the bill was considered in the committee of the whole onMarch 5th and 8th, and was also reported with amendments andprepared for the second reading. The House first took up the billfor consideration and debate from February 17th until February26th, when it was finally considered and ordered transcribed forthe third reading. It was brought forth for the third reading thenext day, February 27th, when it passed with eighty-one yeas andone nay. The sole opposing vote was cast by Grimm.2 2

In the Senate the bill was read the second time on March 11thand was under consideration and debate until March 14th, when itwas voted on and ordered prepared for the third reading. Duringthese days Breck took the most prominent part in the discussionsand debate. He made the majority of motions, suggestions, andchanges. He stood out as a real champion in defense of his work.The bill was brought forth for the third reading the next day,March 15th, and was passed by a vote of twenty-one yeas andthree nays. The opposing votes were cast by Sangston, Stoeverand McCulloch.2 "

22 Journal of the Forty-fourth House of Representatives of the Common-wealth of Pennsylvania, I833-34, I, 483.

2 Journal of the Senate of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, I833-34,I, 522.

73


The bill, as passed and amended in the Senate, was read in theHouse on March 15th. It was again considered by that body,which finally concurred with, and passed the amended bill onMarch 22nd. It was then compared and presented to the governoron March 31st. On April 1, 1834, Governor Wolf attached his sig-nature to the bill and it became law.2 4 Thus a general system ofeducation in Pennsylvania, which had been the hope of many forfifty years, was finally a reality.

To those who are fond of studying the details of school adminis-tration and the historic beginnings of great movements, the act of1834 is excedingly interesting. However, space will not permit acomplete analysis of the law at this time. Sufficient to say thatthe law marks the end of the period characterized by the strugglefor free schools, and the beginning of the period filled with themovements for the perfection of the system.

That there was opposition to the law might be assumed, but theexcitement it aroused is not generally known. To say that it wasopposed would be to put it mildly, for it was received with muchhostility on all sides. It was the most discussed topic of thenewspapers, and the leading topic of discussion in groups in shops,stores, and taverns. The groups which arrayed themselves inopposition included the old aristocratic families which still heldideas of rank and privilege, and did not believe in equality. Theybelieved that there must be two classes: the first, to rule and directaffairs, the second, hewers of wood and drawers of water. Thenthere were the various religious bodies that opposed the freeschool law and taxes for the support of schools. They were notopposed to education generally, but the new law meant that theywould have to break up the system of education which they hadestablished and were willing to support. If they continued theirschools, they would also have to pay taxes for the support of thecommon schools.

To the Germans it meant displacing the language they hadcontinued to use and to which they were greatly attached. Underthe law, all instruction was to be given in English. Another groupconsisted of the ultra-conservatives who believed in the sacrednessof things as they were. They considered the change a great revo-lution in the school policy of the state. Lastly, there was that

74

24 Ibid., I, 655.

SAMUEL BRECK AND THE SCHOOL LAW 75

group of ignorant and narrow-minded people who might not beexpected to favor any system. They argued that the law wouldbreed idleness, vice and crime; that the taxes required wouldgreatly impoverish the people; and that it was unjust to compelthose who had no children to pay for the education of the childrenof others.

All of this opposition was eventually overcome, but not until anattempt had been made to repeal the law at the next legislature.This brought forth a new champion to defend the newly establishedsystem in the person of Thaddeus Stevens. However, those eventsbelong to another topic and must be left for another discussion.

PENNSYLVANIA HISTORY - Journals

Documents

Transcript of PENNSYLVANIA HISTORY - Journals